Ryan Miamis
Intro to GIS – Assignment #6
16 April 2013
Detailed Project Proposal
Introduction
Massachusetts recently passed legislation to fund the decommissioning of dams which no
longer serve their original purpose. My project will use GIS to prioritize dam removal and
explore the potential for hydroelectric development in existing dam facilities in Massachusetts. I
will be using a specific set of criteria to rank dams in terms up suitability for removal and power
development. I plan to incorporate energy, the environment, conservation, recreation, and culture
resources into my analysis. Ideally, high ranking dams will not be serving any type of
recreational function, will open up spawning mileage for anadromous fish, does not serve scenic
or historical value, and has poor attributes for being retrofitted to hydropower. Low ranking
dams for example, might be ideal for electrical generation or are considered a historical
landmark.
Spatial / Geographic Questions
There are many spatial questions that I will want to explore. Some of these questions
have simple yes/no answers and others are relative. I will develop a ranking scale for the criteria.
The most important questions will be:
 Are the dams close to transmission lines and located at a deep and/or wide point
in the river?
 Is the dam located in an environmentally degraded area or is it a barrier to river
spawning fish?
 Is the dam part of a historically significant or scenic setting?
 Does the dam serve a recreational function such as forming a lake that is
swimmable or fishable?
Relevant Literature

Hoenke, Kathleen (2012). A GIS Tool Prioritizing Dams for Removal within the State of
North Carolina. (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from:
http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/5337/Hoenke%20K
%20MP%202012.pdf?sequence=1
This has been an extremely useful resource as I develop my project ideas and plan. I am
more or less following the same steps in this thesis to conduct my analysis. As the title suggests,
this thesis examines dam removal prioritization in North Carolina by using GIS. The author
basically developed a toolkit that I am following. She examines environmental and social
implications of dam removal which I have chosen to adapt along with energy considerations. She
suggests different strategies to weight the different criterion but I will choose my own. This
thesis has also help guide me to different resources and reassured me about some of the data
layers that I was already considering.

Meyer, Tanya, Provencher, Bill, and Sarakinos, Helen (2008). Does Small Dam Removal
Effect Affect Local Property Values? An Empirical Analysis. Contemporary
Economic Policy 26(2): 187-197.
I’m noticing that Helen Sarakinos is some sort of dam removal expert in the Mid-West as
she is involved in a few of the literature that I have come across. This study looked at
property values over time at three different areas: (1) where a dam was removed, (2) where a
dam remains intact, and (3) where a river has been flowing unimpeded for 20 years. The
study concludes that property values of waterfront plots do not increase as a result of dam
removal although non-waterfront properties near free-flowing waters show an increase in
value. This study has steered me away from adding land value and income demographics to
my analysis as originally considered in Assignment 1. My thinking was that dams in lowincome areas and areas in need of investment (i.e. abandoned/vacant plots, contaminated
parcels, etc.) should be considered a higher priority. This study has led me away from that
part of the analysis.

Wegener, Mark and Sarakinos, Helen (2005). Improving Selective Dam Removal in
Wisconsin. Retrieved from:
http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/proc05/papers/pap1550.pdf
Traditionally, dam removal was based on the ability to restore river ecosystems, improve
fish and wildlife populations, and increase recreational opportunities. This paper examines how
GIS can improve selectivity based on predicted ecological benefits of dam removal. The authors
provided spatial questions to consider and also some attributes to think of. The questions are:
Which rives have highest and lowest density of dams? Which dams affect fisheries habitat?
Which dams impact the habitat of species of concern? How much connectivity restored with a
given removal? Which removals will impact headwater areas? Which removal will mitigate
water quality problems? Which removals are on specially designated rivers? The authors show
how to consider these questions and which data layers to use. The other attributes to consider
include: ownership status, impoundment size, structure size, purpose of dam, population around
impoundment, and last inspection date. I intend on using most of the recommendations in my
analysis.

Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (2007). Dam Removal in
Massachusetts: A Basic Guide for Project Proponents. Retrieved from:
http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/eea/water/damremoval-guidance.pdf
This is a guide for dam removal in Massachusetts, from identifying potential dams to
community engagement and funding sources. This document is specific to Massachusetts so
it was particularly useful in thinking about the current situation in the state. Most of the
attributes that the guide proposes I had already thought of but there were a few that I didn’t.
For instance, I never considered dams to be used for road, rail, or other utility crossings. This
would ultimately eliminate or significantly decrease their priority for removal. This guide
offers a good overview of the initial reconnaissance but does not give specific GIS
instructions. However, I still consider it useful.

U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of the Army, and U.S. Department of
Energy (2007). Potential Hydroelectric Development at Existing Federal
Facilities. Retreved from:
http://www.usbr.gov/power/data/1834/Sec1834_EPA.pdf
This study was conducted in collaboration with three government agencies. The project
examined potential electric conversion at Federal dam facilities across the country. The study
was most useful in thinking about what criteria and data I might use to consider dams for electric
retrofitting. Among these metrics are stream flow, hydraulic head, and capacity as a result of
these attributes. The document also provided a list of screening attributes that would eliminate
possible sites for retrofit. These include: National Rivers, National Historic Areas, Wild and
Scenic Rivers, National Monuments, and Critical Habitat. This also gave me ideas about where
to search for more data.
Data
Date Set
Name
Dams
Description
Source
Dams in MA
MassGIS
Transmission Power Lines in
Lines
MA
MassGIS
Anadromous
Fish
River Spawning
fish by dam
presence in MA
MassGIS
Areas of
Critical
Environment
al Concern
MHC
Historic
Inventory
Significant
MassGIS
natural and
cultural resource
Scenic
Landscape
Scenic areas in
MA
Historic points
MassGIS
and areas in MA
MassGIS
URL
Attributes/Variabl
es
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research Indicates relative
-and-tech/it-serv-anddam size through
support/application-serv/officeREGAUTH field
of-geographic-informationand safety
massgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
through
HAZCODE field
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research Description of
-and-tech/it-serv-andtransmission lines
support/application-serv/officeof-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research
-and-tech/it-serv-andsupport/application-serv/officeof-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research
-and-tech/it-serv-andsupport/application-serv/officeof-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research
-and-tech/it-serv-andsupport/application-serv/officeof-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research
-and-tech/it-serv-andsupport/application-serv/office-
Specific shapefile
for dam presence
among these fish
Identifies location
of historic
landmark
Inventory
Hydrology
Rivers, lakes,
streams, and
ponds in MA
MassGIS
Fish and
Boating
Access Sites
Points in MA
MassGIS
Canoe Trips
and Access
Points
Points in MA
MassGIS
BioMap2
Comprehensive
data layer for
environmental
consideration in
MA
Table of Stream
flows in rivers
in MA
MassGIS
Real-time
Stream Flow
USGS
of-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research
-and-tech/it-serv-andsupport/application-serv/officeof-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research
-and-tech/it-serv-andsupport/application-serv/officeof-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research
-and-tech/it-serv-andsupport/application-serv/officeof-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research
-and-tech/it-serv-andsupport/application-serv/officeof-geographic-informationmassgis/datalayers/layerlist.html
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ma/nwis
/rt
Indicate
recreation
Indicate
recreation
Indicates power
of river flow and
thus energy
potential
Tentative Analysis Process
The majority of my data in already clipped to Massachusetts and will have the correct projection.
I will need to prepare the Real-Time Stream Flow data.
Below in the roadmap that I intend to use for my project:
The first step is to determine if a dam needs to be addressed. Is it no longer serving its original
purpose? I want to eliminate dams that are in use.
Secondly, I want to eliminate dams that will not be removed because of cultural values. Is the
dam scenic or historical? The dams in Lowell come to mind. I am not going to propose dam
removal in the canals because they are a cultural value to the city and state. Also, I am assuming
that dams located in scenic landscapes are part of the reason that the site is scenic.
Next, I want to examine that relationship between energy potential and the environment. In my
final ranking formula (weights formula), good energy potential rankings will lower the dam’s
priority for removal and vice versa. The opposite is true for the environment. Energy and
environment criteria will have specific criteria to evaluate it. This criterion is in the form of the
specific datasets. I have provided some examples in the flowchart.
In conclusion, dams will first be screened by condition and historical/scenic value. The
remaining dams will be graded by their environmental and energy potential attributes. I will then
combine the rankings in a formula to determine which dams are best for removal and which ones
a best for hydropower retrofitting.
Products for Poster
I plan to include a variety of different visual aids for my final poster including:



Maps: (1) showing dams that will be best for energy retrofitting and (2) showing dams
that are best for removal. These might be the top 10 or 20.
Tables: I plan to have a list of the names of the top 10-20 dams for removal
Graphs: This is an idea that I have not fully developed but I am thinking of including a
graph (with environment on one axis and energy on the other) that shows where each
dam is valued based on its importance for environmental restoration and energy potential.
For example, a dam that isn’t going to contribute much to the habitat if removed and has
no potential for energy generation would be located near the origin. Then, a dam that
could benefit that environment tremendously and a dam that would be great for
hydropower would be in the upper right corner of the graph. I just want to observe the
relationship between energy and the environment. The formula is chose to use will
basically put the two at odds. The graph will show just how much these two are at odds in
Massachusetts. ***This might be too much analysis at the end.